THUKKARAM Vs. SHANTHI VARADHARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff, who lost his case for declaration of title and for permanent injunction before both the courts below, is the appellant herein.

(2.) It is the case of the plaintiff/appellant that he is the absolute owner of the A schedule property including the common pathway measuring 2-1/2 feet in width and 42-1/2 feet in length. The plaintiff, his tenant and the first defendant are using the said common pathway to reach their respective portions. Contending that there is no other pathway for the plaintiff to reach the rear portion of the property and that the first defendant is attempting to interfere with the plaintiff's right to use the common pathway, the plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration of title and also for permanent injunction.

(3.) The first defendant, who is the purchaser of the rear portion of the A schedule property from the wife of the plaintiff, who has been arrayed as second defendant, would contend in the written statement that with the knowledge of the plaintiff, the entire right of using the suit pathway was sold away to the first defendant. It is contended that the plaintiff, who is aware of the alienation of the pathway by his wife, the second defendant herein, has now come forward with the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction. The first defendant allowed the plaintiff and his tenants to use the pathway only on licence basis. The first defendant has terminated the licence granted to the plaintiff by issuing a legal notice. Therefore, it is contended by the first defendant that the plaintiff has no right in the pathway, which has been exclusively purchased by the first defendant.